Oh, we figure out how much we can afford to pay and try to stick to it, but... Oh Lord! Some left fielder struts along with his gaudy slugging average, just flaunting his batting average with runners in scoring position...

He's already 31, the bulk of his prime years are past him. Once a player gets past 31, it is unpredictable when he will start to break down. For all we know, he might start a steep decline at 32. It's happened before. Just look at Adam Dunn. He might have many prime years ahead of him, but it is just as likely if not more so that he will break down early in this contract.

Eh, that's a bit dramatic, for every 1 guy you can name off the top of your head breaking down at 32 (you can name them because, of course, those are the extreme outliers), there are hundreds, if not thousands of players, who stick to a pretty well defined career arc that the projections are based off, so yes, while it is possible that Robbie Cano could be hit by a meteor tomorrow and never fulfill his contractual obligations for the Mariners, statistically speaking, it appears that they should get their money's worth.

Probably riskier for Seattle that Cano has to move out of 2B at some point. Obviously, his offense is greatly exaggerated because he plays such an offensively bare position. If the going rate for 1 WAR is approximately $6 million in today's market, at 2B he should pay the M's back but he has to move to a more premium offensive position, then his decline will accelerate not only from aging, but also because he skillset relative to his peers isn't so unique.

No but sometimes you have to overpay at the end of a deal to get the prime years at a discount which, if Cano plays as he is projected to over the course of this contract, the Mariners will actually get a solid return on their investment:

It's also worth noting, I haven't seen how the dollars break down per year, but if he's making a straight $24 million per year every year, that also works out very heavily in Seattle's favor as $24 million won't be as valuable in 10 years as it is now.

Good point. Salaries seem to be on the rise as teams are raking in local TV contract money.

A 10-yr deal is certainly a risk for the M's, but I don't think it's guaranteed to be awful for them. A couple of years ago, I thought we'd all be laughing at the Tigers being stuck with that awful contract they gave to Fielder - but they were able to unload him this offseason.

Not as long term, but everyone insisted that the Marlins would be stuck with the deal they gave Buehrle, but they were able to trade him after 1 season.

Who knows, this could be another Pujols-type bad deal where the Angels not only signed a declining player to a 10-yr deal, but they also gave up the Wacha draft pick slot in the process. But, I don't think that's a certainty.

Eh, that's a bit dramatic, for every 1 guy you can name off the top of your head breaking down at 32 (you can name them because, of course, those are the extreme outliers), there are hundreds, if not thousands of players, who stick to a pretty well defined career arc that the projections are based off, so yes, while it is possible that Robbie Cano could be hit by a meteor tomorrow and never fulfill his contractual obligations for the Mariners, statistically speaking, it appears that they should get their money's worth.

Probably riskier for Seattle that Cano has to move out of 2B at some point. Obviously, his offense is greatly exaggerated because he plays such an offensively bare position. If the going rate for 1 WAR is approximately $6 million in today's market, at 2B he should pay the M's back but he has to move to a more premium offensive position, then his decline will accelerate not only from aging, but also because he skillset relative to his peers isn't so unique.

The problem with valuing his contract based on 1 WAR being equal to $6 million is that you are using today's level of production from Cano and assuming it will continue. Sure it's more likely than not he won't break down in the next year, but what about 35? That's a perfectly reasonable age for the body to show wear and for him to steeply drop off. That's only 4 or 5 years into this mess of a contract.

His stats, which of course include advanced stat metrics such as WAR, will fall considerably during the course of this contract, which means today's stats cannot be used as a measure for the value of a 10 year deal.

The problem with valuing his contract based on 1 WAR being equal to $6 million is that you are using today's level of production from Cano and assuming it will continue. Sure it's more likely than not he won't break down in the next year, but what about 35? That's a perfectly reasonable age for the body to show wear and for him to steeply drop off. That's only 4 or 5 years into this mess of a contract.

His stats, which of course include advanced stat metrics such as WAR, will fall considerably during the course of this contract, which means today's stats cannot be used as a measure for the value of a 10 year deal.

Yes, obviously, nobody is arguing that Cano will continue this type of production forever, but that is how projections work, you look at how an individual player's past performance fits with historic trends and make an educated guess as to what his future will hold.

It should also be noted that 1 WAR will not equal $6 M in 10 years due to inflation. So it also depends on how evenly or backloaded this deal is. In 10 years, when Cano's production will surely be at a much lower level, the relative value of his contract will also be lower.